Xata Agent: AI agent expert in PostgreSQL
github.com
github.com
SLOW_QUERIES_PLAYBOOK
GENERAL_MONITORING_PLAYBOOK
TUNING_PLAYBOOK
INVESTIGATE_HIGH_CPU_USAGE_PLAYBOOK
INVESTIGATE_HIGH_CONNECTION_COUNT_PLAYBOOK
INVESTIGATE_LOW_MEMORY_PLAYBOOK
Looks like they are orchestrated by these system prompts: https://github.com/xataio/agent/blob/69329cede85d4bc920558c0...I think a key for this one is "I use preset SQL commands. I will never run destructive (even potentially destructive) commands against your database." If it's also locked down to only informational queries (and not leaking user tables to the LLM providers) I think why not try this?
I do wonder about cost of this at scale; compared to the cost of the services being monitored. Hopefully an Agent tax doesn't become another Datadog tax.
One idea that we want to experiment with is that we let the model pick the next time that it runs (between bounds). So if the model has any reason of concern it runs more often, otherwise maybe once every couple of hours is enough.
Are there risks associated with sending DB info off to these third parties?
You can use AWS Bedrock and get access to Claude, and then just have something that proxies from your tool over to AWS. It'll work provided you can set a provider URL for the LLM.
So provided that you trust AWS you can use at least Claude (the best LLM anyway [at least today]) with confidence.
Documentation asserts: > I use preset SQL commands. I will never run destructive (even potentially destructive) commands against your database.
This is enforced by taking the responsibility for generating SQL in order to evaluate state out of the hands of the LLM. The LLM simply interprets results of predetermined commands based on a set of prompts/playbooks: https://github.com/xataio/agent/blob/69329cede85d4bc920558c0...
This doesn't take anything out of the hands of the LLM.
I'm extremely interested in the latter but not at all in the first.